Oh ffs, get over yourself Elon. It's just a job. People have lives, they're not your servants. Despite what you might want, nowadays nobody has to work like they're in a 19th-century mill. #deadbirdsite
They're getting paid an awful lot of money. Time to work for it.
@amerika I'm not saying they shouldn't. But working long hours for more money should be a right, not an obligation. I'm sure you don't mean to say that workers' rights are a bad thing?
Also, we might note that worker's rights have been an utter disaster.
Remember why trains got replaced by trucks?
Or wonder why the NHS is always broke?
Maybe even how lots of jobs went offshore and to illegal aliens?
Thank a union.
Workers are worth what they produce. You treat the good ones well.
Sometimes, it's crunch time, and you're at the office quite a bit.
If I limited my workday every day to 8 hrs I'd never get anywhere.
@amerika Well, I think we have a fundamental difference of opinion there! It seems obvious to me that unions have done immeasurable good *for workers*, which is kinda the point of them. If they've also made it harder for companies to function, I have no problem with that. Without legislation to even the playing field, it's ludicrous to rely on the beneficence of bosses to "treat the good ones well", as you put it. Call me an idealist if you like, but I believe minimum wage, maternity and paternity rights, pension provision, holiday and sickness entitlements etc. are of great benefit to society. And also, you might argue that the hypothetical fast food employee you mention provides a far more useful function than a twitter employee by feeding people (one cannot live on tweets alone) and the pay discrepancy is much greater than it ought to be. But, hey, maybe I have some deep-rooted anti-meritocracy feelings going on :)
>Call me an idealist if you like, but I believe minimum wage, maternity and paternity rights, pension provision, holiday and sickness entitlements etc. are of great benefit to society.
Tell that to all the people it makes economically unemployable.
If you increase the associated costs of employing people, you will remove people from the workforce from the bottom up. The least capable, least intelligent, least diligent, least worthy, will be priced out. You are, paradoxically, the oppressor, for fighting for these "rights."
@book @amerika I couldn't disagree more. You would remove companies from the least ethical up, and if there's a need for the services those companies provide then the space would quickly be filled by those able to pay a decent living wage, which everyone ought to be able to enjoy in a civilised society, regardless of skillset, disability or other demographic. It's obvious to me that my more socialist viewpoint is not something that is ever going to sit well with you, so I'm not going to discuss this any further. It is refreshing to step out of my twitter echo-chamber, but I have more important things to do than carry on with this conversation! Thank you for your input, though.
@karlequin @book
The "ought" here is questionable to me. I think we need the most competent doing the work, and if others are less competent, they should be rewarded less. This way we all benefit from incompetence.
Of course I oppose socialism; I saw the Wall. Did you?